You are on page 1of 1

C 101/40 EN Official Journal of the European Union 26.4.

2003

or at the very least confidential, information by the were officials of the Commission in Luxembourg, the
representative of the European Commission in Marseille; cost of the sea passage from Brindisi to various Greek
frontier posts (Corfu, Igoumenitsa, Patras) on the basis of
— order the defendant to pay all the recoverable costs, an ‘aircraft type seat’ ticket;
which amounts to EUR 10 000.
— annul all the applicants’ reimbursement statements
implementing the decisions annulment of which is
sought;
Pleas in law and main arguments
— pay the applicants the entire amount which is outstanding
as a result of the implementation of the decisions
The applicant claims that, during a meeting in Marseille on annulment of which is sought, together with interest at
23 January 2003, a representative of the defendant divulged the legal rate;
deceitful or at the very least confidential information. Such
disclosure resulted in damage for which it seeks compensation — order the Commission to pay the costs, expenses and fees
in the present application. In support of its arguments, the incurred.
applicant alleges non-contractual liability of the defendant in
the context of Article 288 EC and alleged breach of the
confidentiality obligation imposed on the representative of the
defendant by Article 287 EC. Pleas in law and main arguments

In the present case, the applicants seek the annulment of the


decision of the Commission changing the procedure for
calculating the annual expense of travelling to Greece.

Action brought on 7 February 2003 by Giorgio Lebedef In support of the (main and alternative) arguments for
and Others against Commission of the European Com- annulment, the applicants essentially rely on six pleas in law
munities alleging, first, infringement of Article 71 of the Staff Regu-
lations and of Articles 7 and 8 of Annex VII thereto;
second, breach of the principle of non-discrimination; third,
(Case T-44/03) infringement of the rights of the defence; fourth, breach of the
principle that arbitrary procedures are prohibited and of the
(2003/C 101/73) obligation to provide a statement of reasons; fifth, breach of
the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations and
of the rule ‘patere legem quam ipse fecisti’; and sixth, breach
(Language of the case: French) of the duty to have regard for the welfare and interests of
officials.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-


ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 7 February 2003 by Giorgio
Lebedef, residing in Senningerberg (Luxembourg), and 49
other officials, represented by Gilles Bounéou, lawyer, with an
address for service in Luxembourg. Action brought on 6 February 2003 by Riva Acciaio S.p.A.
against the Commission of the European Communities
The applicants claim that the Court should:
(Case T-45/03)
— annul the decision of the competent hierarchical authority
changing, in respect of 1993, 1994 and 1995 or the (2003/C 101/74)
period within those years during which the applicants
were officials of the Commission in Luxembourg, the
procedure for calculating the annual expense of travelling (Language of the case: Italian)
to Greece in respect of the journey via Brindisi, as taken
into consideration for certain destinations;
alternatively, An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
— annul the decision of the competent hierarchical authority European Communities on 6 February 2003 by Riva Acciaio
to reimburse, in respect of 1993, 1994 and 1995 or the S.p.A., represented by Aurelio Pappalardo, Massimo Merola,
period within those years during which the applicants Maurizio Pappalardo and Federica Martin, lawyers.